Johnson's Accused

When criticizing an audience for a fault as grave as corruption, a
writer must first and foremost make his readers acknowledge their
share of the blame. In Rambler No. 172, Johnson leaves us unconvinced
of our guilt by aiming his most crucial attacks at a distant "he" who
we do not always recognize as a stand-in for ourselves:

The greater part of mankind are corrupt in every condition, and differ
in high and in low stations, only as they have more or fewer
opportunities of gratifying their desires, or as they are more or less
restrained by human censures. [p. 1]

I doubt whether this paper will have a single reader that may not
apply the story to himself, and recollect some hours of his life in
which he has been equally overpowered by the transitory charms of
trifling novelty. [p. 2]

In common life, reason and conscience have only the appetites and
passions to encounter; but in higher stations, they must oppose
artifice and adulation. He, therefore, that yields to such
temptations, cannot give those who look upon his miscarriage much
reason for exultation, since few can justly presume that from the same
snare they should have been able to escape. [p.3]

In contrast to Johnson, Montaigne pulls the reader into the text by
using the inclusive "we" in "On Cannibals":

But there never was any opinion so irregular, as to excuse treachery,
disloyalty, tyranny, and cruelty, which are our familiar vices. We may
then call these people barbarous, in respect to the rules of reason:
but not in respect to ourselves, who in all sorts of barbarity exceed
them. [p. 6]

By using "we" and addressing his accusations to a group that
explicitly includes the reader, Montaigne forces the reader to
recognize his own faults of judgment about so-called barbarians.

Questions

As opposed to Montaigne's, does Johnson's argument suffer from his
choice in pronoun?

While Montaigne seems to admit that he too called cannibals barbarians
at one point, does it seem that Johnson ever committed the same act of
judgment for which he accuses his readers?

How does Johnson's style differ from the satire of Swift in "A Modest
Proposal"? Which is more engaging and which is more persuasive?